According to the 2010 FBI crime data, since 1980, single victim killings have dropped by more than 40 percent. While that's very good news,
there's a new sobering trend: Mass murders are on the rise. This New York Times article researched the frequency of mass murders. It found during the
20th century there were about one to two mass murders per decade until 1980. Then for no apparent reason they spiked, with nine during the 1980s and
11 in the 1990s. Since the year 2000 there have been at least 26, including the massacre in Aurora, Colorado.

Since 1980, which is a bit disingenuous. ALso the definition: (4 or more) considering that the majority of those cited are associated with
the illegal drug trade, it does not hold the fact that the mass spree killings are on the rise. Broaden the dedinition and of course you'll expand
the numbers.

1 to 2 mass murders per decade up until the 80's

9 in the 1980's
11 in the 1990's

Since 2000 there have been 27

Mass murders being defined as 4 or more victims.

No matter how you look at it or what names you call it - that's a rise in mass murders.

11 durnig the so called "assault weapons ban." Looks like assault weapon bans do not stop mass murders.

Even if you take the NY Times article at face value, it still shows that the decades where we had less gun control, we had less mass murders. Up until
1968, you could buy semi-automatic rifles through the mail from SEARS, yet there were no school shootings in the 30's, 40's, 50.s, 60's, and
70's.

edit on 19-12-2012 by NavyDoc because: (no reason given)

Great, whatever, all good and well but you can't begin gun control without some gun control.

And you CAN ban assault and automatic weapons
and control guns without bothering the second amendment.

I always ask:
Where were the Constitutionalist when the 4th amendment was getting shredded?

We lost our 4th Amendment protections after 9/11.

in the interest of National Security any of us can be strip searched for no reason.
Our 4th amendment protected us from that, unless suspected of a crime,
but what do you know..... GONE NOW!

Now we are all presumed criminals and guilty first.

So what's that about the sanctity of that Constitution again?
People wipe their butts on it.

Great, whatever, all good and well but you can't begin gun control without some gun control.

And you CAN ban assault and automatic weapons
and control guns without bothering the second amendment.

I always ask:
Where were the Constitutionalist when the 4th amendment was getting shredded?

We lost our 4th Amendment protections after 9/11.

in the interest of National Security any of us can be strip searched for no reason.
Our 4th amendment protected us from that, unless suspected of a crime,
but what do you know..... GONE NOW!

Now we are all presumed criminals and guilty first.

So what's that about the sanctity of that Constitution again?
People wipe their butts on it.

Automatic weapons are already banned. They have been since the NFA of 1934.
You can't control guns without infringing upon the second amendment just as you cannot "control" voting without infringing upon the 15th and 19th
amendments.

I agree about the shredding of the 4th Amendment, not just by the patriot act, but also by the war on drugs (tm). Why react to one assault on civil
liberties by supporting another? The government that gave you the above things is the same government that wants to disarm its populace. Does that
not seem concerning?

We Constitutionalists and Libertarians were against the patriot act and against the WOD, but we lost for the same reason we will probably lose the war
on self defense: that so many voters are mindless morons who would sacrifice their civil liberties for a hollow promise of security bolstered by fear.

This content community relies on user-generated content from our member contributors. The opinions of our members are not those of site ownership who maintains strict editorial agnosticism and simply provides a collaborative venue for free expression.